THE HONGKONG GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 12TH NOVEMBER, 1879. 657
EXCISE ORDINANCE (OPIUM) 1879 AMENDMENT BILL.
This Bill was read a first time.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL explained that the object of the Bill was to make better provisions for the apprehension and punishment of offenders against the Opium Ordinance. In Section 13 of Ordinance 2 of 1858 a fine of $250 was imposed for the first offence, and $500 for a second offence, with simple imprisonment; it was now proposed to increase these penalties-as those persons who found it to their interest to break the Opium Ordinance seemed well able to pay-to $500 for a first, and $1,000 for a second offence, with imprisonment with or without hard labour for six months. A few ambiguous definitions were also cleared up; and as doubts had been expressed as to the powers of the excise officers to arrest without a warrant, it was provided that it would be sufficient reason for arrest if reasonable ground existed that any one possessed prepared opium that had not paid duty to the Opium Farmer.
DEPORTATION AND ILLEGAL FLOGGINGS.
His EXCELLENCY said. After the meeting of the Executive Council yesterday evening, when we had gone through the Estimates for 1880 and approved of the Bills to be placed in the Order Book for to-day, the Clerk of Councils received a note from an Honourable member saying that he wished to make some observations on Deportation at this meeting. I accordingly added to the printed list, of Orders the following," No. 7, the Honourable W. KESWICK'S observations on Deportation."
Honourable W. KESWICK.—I am much obliged to your Excellency for affording me to-day the opportunity of making a few remarks. I was late in applying yesterday, but I thought I should receive the consideration you have kindly given. On the 29th May your Excellency entered very elaborately into a defence of your policy on deportation, and stated at considerable length particulars of the action which you had taken, asserting also that every man had been deported whose case was considerd by the Executive Council as requiring deportation and whose sentence according to the Attorney General was legal. Your Excellency invited observations on the papers laid upon the table. I suggested it would be well to defer their consideration or remarks upon them until such time as they had been read. I have had an opportunity of going through those papers, and I approached them with a feeling of pleasure that an opportunity would be afforded of removing what your Excellency termed strange misconceptions with regard to the treatment of criminals. I had also the pleasure of considering that I would be going over the same ground that Mr. LowсOCK had traversed so satisfactorily and who, according to your Excellency, explained that had he been in your place he would have acted precisely as you have done. The examination of these papers, however, proved disappointing to me. I did not find in them that in all cases-that cardinal statement of your Excellency-every man had been deported whose case had been considered by the Executive Council to require deportation. The documents were so volumnious that I had to take notes of them. I hope your Excellency will allow me to refer to them in that form. And it is important that as much documentary evidence of the facts which I lay before you should be given as possible. I am under the impression that these documents prove that dangerous criminals have been set free unconditionally instead of being deported under the laws specially provided for the purpose.-
His EXCELLENCY.-I beg the Honourable member's pardon, but he seems to be reading his speech. Honourable W. KESWICK said he was not going to read a prepared speech.
His EXCELLENCY.-I think we had better adhere as far as possible to the printed rules and regulations of the Legislative Council, and one rule clearly is that reading from a paper of that kind is opposed to the regulations. I wish to give the Honourable member every facility in the course he has now entered on, but he will remember from the minutes of the last meeting, confirmed to-day, that - it was agreed that the Acting Attorney General, (Mr. RUSSELL,) was to look over these documents, and any papers that were required to be printed could be so printed. Well, that has not been done, and there is some inconvenience in this course being adopted as other members have not seen the papers; they have been for months in the possession of the Honourable gentleman, (Mr. KESWICK,) and as he gave notice only last evening. I did not call for them, to refresh my memory, till to-day,—but as far as I am personally concerned that is an inconvenience I raise no objection to. But it is as well for us not to do too much in breaking the rules of the Council.
Honourable W. KESWICK.-I will ask your Excellency if I shall be in order in referring to matters which it is impossible for me to remember with accuracy, such as dates, matters referred to in papers, and others on which it is important there should be no inistake.
His EXCELLENCY.--Certainly, Rule eleven says :-"No member shall be allowed to read a speech, but may obtain permission to introduce documentary matters."
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.